I love the Scottish fighter. If the Germans attack both, scrambling savages the Luftwaffe. Harder for Germany to function.
2IPC to UK_Pac bank then - the sub in SZ98 is a given.
Of course, there are other options like ftr in Moscow and fly everything to Yunnan USSR1 to strengthen against Japan.
Subs in 91 and 98, then an Inf for Alex and Sudan.
Tobruk crush is over rated. There’s only one artillery and one tank there so not much offensive power and I don’t doubt you are sacrificing the UK TT to hit it. I see a better value proposition in hitting Ethiopia. There the one art is protected by only 2 inf.
You would strip the tac from Taranto?
You need to if they use the Slovak ftr to reinforce Tobruk. That becomes 59% to the defenders without more reinforcement.
Anyone mind explaining to a newbie this Bid stuff? I see people talk about it and the axis always gets a negative number. Is it really that easy for the axis powers to win the game?
Strollmasta, even with a 20-30 bid good Allied players only win 45% of the time against good Axis players. Those are the stats from hundreds of online league games for players who probably have 50-500 games of experience. Sure the game is balanced for relatively inexperienced players, but the flexibility of the Axis air force gives them the strategic advantage when controlled by competent people. For example, Germany has the options to switch up between the following strategies:
The flexibility of the air force to support all 6 roles, along with the flexibility of fast moving mechs + tanks gives an experienced player so many options that he can go after depending on the Allied response. People will claim that a major spending effort by the US to build up an Atlantic fleet can stop Germany, but that just opens up Japan to push harder in the Pacific theater. If Japan has conquered India and has naval superiority in the Pacific, victory is essentially guaranteed. Allies have to win in both theaters, not just one.
Current bids for traditional G40 games have ballooned up to 40 PUs. A large number of planes or ground units are required to tip the balance back towards the Allies in the early game. Alternatively the Balanced Mod makes things relatively fair by slowing down the Japanese invasion in China by requiring occupying ground units in each conquered territory, and also giving the Allies additional income through objectives.
@Arthur:
Strollmasta, even with a 20-30 bid good Allied players only win 45% of the time against good Axis players.� � Those are the stats from hundreds of online league games for players who probably have 50-500 games of experience.�
I want to get beat by an Axis player with an allied bid of 30. I need to see it to believe it. I’m not a good Axis and Allies player, not much experience either and certainly prefer playing Axis. Most of my games are Axis.
I will give you 30 PU Allied bid (one unit limit placed only in territories and SZs that currently have Allied units). Let me know what you want and I will set it up on the Forum. FYI: I am slightly below average for League players.
Sounds like a fun game.
I will private message you.
The limitation of one unit per territory or sea zone which currently have Allied units means no 1 infantry placed on New Guinea. I accept the limitations.
For the sake of the discussion, in table top tournaments there’s no limit on how many units are placed in a particular zone or Sea Zone.
that is not the case, the rule prevails in most situations that you can only place 1 unit per SZ or territory where you already have units. that is the format for all live play I have done at conventions and tournaments
otherwise, there might be a good reason simply to buy bid/3 = 13 French infantry and alter the odds of the opener such that Germany cannot attack all 3 (4) targets at pat odds
the bid is a house rule however, you can use it in a different way if you prefer
that is not the case, the rule prevails in most situations that you can only place 1 unit per SZ or territory where you already have units.� � that is the format for all live play I have done at conventions and tournaments
Please clear this up for me Taamvan.
I haven’t been to the GenCon table top game so I really don’t know what I’m talking about. I’ve played in person with people who do, and they stated there’s usually no restriction on the amount of units put in one place. Been told by them that the restriction is mostly an online thing. I asked him, well, what if the bid is say 24 IPCs and the allies simply place 8 infantry in Paris. His answer was, well, then Germany would just bring in more planes to smash that. It might result in SZ110 or SZ111 not being attacked. That is how in that bid situation it might still result in a more balanced game.
Below is a previous conversation regarding this subject.
If there was no limit on the number of units that can be placed in one territory, the optimal plan would be placing a nice stack of Chinese infantry or inf + artillery in Yunnan. Fly in a few Russian fighters on R1 and Japan can’t attack it. China might have to retreat to Kweichow on Ch1, but with even more artillery added to the stack they would have similar number of units in mainland Asia as Japan has. China could easily retake Yunnan on Ch2, bringing the stack up to 30 or more inf+art by the end of Ch3. Russia could then bring back the fighters to slow down the German advances. Adding just 2 infantry to Yunnan makes the J1 attack risky and the game starts to be based on a few dice rolls; any more than that amount prevents Japan from even contemplating attacking the territory or holding onto it reliably ever in the game.
Japan could eventually defeat this stack with enough resources poured into the effort, but that frees up USA to focus nearly 100% on Germany. This changes the game too much from WW2 history with the Imperial Army cowering in fear from the hordes of Chinese resistance. The placement limit keeps some of the historical accuracy.
The thread that was referenced was in regards to G42, a setup that apparently is more balanced than the standard G40.
No argument from me on the rule of 1 per territory and the reason behind for balance makes perfect sense. I think those bid rules make the game fair.
Just saying what I heard from some players who play table top at the GenCon…but yes it was the G42 setup and that really changes things.
Thanks guys! Looks like I have a lot to think about. Really like the fighter idea on Scotland. 👍
They did get into Burma although they never took down Calcutta.
3 British subs, 91,98 and 110. Sub in 110 submerges G1
…
Sub in 110 submerges G1
Not necessarily; If Germany goes Little bit too tight, you have the option of an extra hit to soak. And this Sub has first shot, too.
@hecatomb:
…
Sub in 110 submerges G1Not necessarily; If Germany goes Little bit too tight, you have the option of an extra hit to soak. And this Sub has first shot, too.
Yes, you can choose to have it in the battle, but the sub comes in handy on British round 1. It can attack a damaged German battleship. It can convoy, it gives flexibility for British buys and it is also not too shabby in protecting against sea lion on round 2 and 3
@Arthur:
Strollmasta, even with a 20-30 bid good Allied players only win 45% of the time against good Axis players.� � Those are the stats from hundreds of online league games for players who probably have 50-500 games of experience.�
I want to get beat by an Axis player with an allied bid of 30. I need to see it to believe it. I’m not a good Axis and Allies player, not much experience either and certainly prefer playing Axis. Most of my games are Axis.
ABH is really an outstanding G40 player and he’s also very humble! I’m eating crow here! In our game, only through G2, the situation on the board already indicates a challenge for the Allies to gain the upper hand. It seems like Germany already significantly mitigated the bid which all went to the UK Europe board. ABH has already demonstrated how the Axis could still win a game despite a bid of 30. I want to play it out a little more to see how the situation develops of course.
I’ve been in games where an allied bid of just 12 IPCs (2 UK subs), was enough to shut Italy down or make it irrelevant (me playing Axis) because both subs survived and Italy only has 1 destroyer. I’m not very good at this game, but dang, I thought that 30 would have been a lot. I have a lot more humble pie to eat from ABH.
It has been a fun game Ichabod. We are still in the early stages and things have been working out along the standard route so far in the first 1.3 rounds. The Italian and UK fleets have been annihilated, Italy gave up Africa without contest since most of the bid went there, and Japan is preparing for a J2 DoW (spoiler alert although there is nothing to do on R2 to stop it). The game is starting to transition to the mid-game region where Japan is trying to get its economy up towards 70 PUs and threaten India while Germany makes a push towards Moscow. Small tactical moves will likely swing the game to either side.
I have been watching some League games where the bids have crept up north of 40 PUs. At that point the Allies have some more options. With additional land units, Russia can go toe-to-toe with the German horde heading to Moscow. Alternatively China can be boosted to a point where they can hold Yunnan or reclaim it with overwhelming strength on round 2. I have never seen the Axis win if Yunnan is Allied control during the mid-game. The difficulty of getting troops to Mainland Asia while controlling the Money Islands makes the situation untenable.
